Anti-gay activist to argue for freedom of expression in Supreme Court

The man who came under fire for distributing homophobic flyers in Saskatchewan a decade ago will finally get his day in the Supreme Court of Canada Wednesday to defend what he says is his right to free speech.

William Whatcott passed out flyers in Regina and Saskatoon in 2010 and 2011, with statements such as, “Our acceptance of homosexuality and our toleration of its promotion in our school system will lead to the early death and morbidity of many children,” and “Sodomites are 430 times more likely to acquire Aids [sic] and 3 times more likely to sexually abuse children!”

He was brought before the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for his actions.

At issue Wednesday is whether or not Section 14 (1) b of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, which prohibits the publication or display of material “that exposes or tends to expose to hatred, ridicules, belittles or otherwise affronts the dignity of any person or class of persons,” should trump that fundamental freedom of expression enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, by overturning a Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission’s decision ordering Whatcott to pay four complainants $17,500 in compensation, has brought the conflict to a head.

In a Tuesday statement, David Arnot, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Chief Commissioner, appealed to Canadians to endorse his side’s view that Whatcott’s actions are against the law.

“As Canadians, we understand that there is a justifiable and narrow limit on the freedom of expression when it has the potential to harm others in the community,” Arnot said.

That’s why, he explained, many forms of expression such as child pornography, obscenity and violence-inducing expressions are prohibited.

“In the case of public speech, where expression has the real potential to escalate and expose a target group to hate, we have a responsibility to act,” Arnot said. “It is in this spirit that we have come to the Supreme Court to argue that William Whatcott’s words and behavior have crossed the line between critical speech and hateful speech.”

In their factum — a statement of facts filed with the Supreme Court — Whatcott’s lawyers say their client was “engaged in same-sex sexual activity until his conversion” but “is now a Christian activist who believes he is called by God to speak out against the harm of same-sex sexual relations.”

Whatcott’s lawyers argue that the Supreme Court has been presented an opportunity.

“It presents an opportunity for the court to affirm that freedom of expression is not limited only to matters about which there is agreement but to matters about which there can be great—and sometimes heated, disagreement,” their supreme court respondent factum reads.

“The case is about how we as citizens in a free and democratic society live together with disagreement.”